Romney has business experience running Bain Capital and creating companies such as AMC, Staples, Burger King, Dominos Pizza, Sports Authority, Toys R Us, Burington Coat Factory and The Weather Channel. However Perry was govenor of Texas, which has created 39% of the jobs created in the US since Obama took office. So both would be much better at creating jobs than Obama. Obama has never created a job or even worked a job in the private sector. He has no clue how to create them and thats why the country has lost millions of them under his watch
I love how the story below this one about Obama coming up with a new jobs bill wont allow you to post any comments because a Steve Harvey story pops up when you try too. On MTO every story related to Obama doesnt allow you to comment on it, because they know there story is BS. He didnt come up with a new jobs bill, he said in a month he will annouce some new ideas....after his bus tour and 10 day vacation. He has no real ideas. He didnt announce any during his speech in Iowa yesterday, he just blamed everyone but himself for 30min
Continued...
[link to external website removed] con-job
Debunking Perry’s con is easy. The Bureau of Labor and Statistics found that Texas’ jobless rate has steadily crept up in recent months not plunged to zero as Perry would have the nation believe. Unemployment was over 8 percent in June. New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Wisconsin, and a slew of other states beat Texas on the employment numbers. And New York and several other states that outshined Texas did it without gutting environmental and labor regulations, slashing taxes, and with bare boned spending on education, housing, unemployment benefits and health services, as in Texas.
Even the 8 percent plus figure on Teas unemployment, though below the national jobless figure, is horribly misleading. In the state’s big cities, such as Houston, the jobless rate matches the national figure, and in rural, impoverished areas, the jobless rate soars to double digit figures. This means only one thing. More and more people in the state have sunk into or never risen out of poverty. The quality of life indexes on Texas amply confirm that. And an increase in the number of poor people invariably translate out to more children in poverty, greater income disparities, a dearth in quality prenatal care, and higher teen birth rates. Texas ranks in the bottom ten in every one of these areas and is a rock bottom number 50 among the nation’s 50 states in the number who graduate from high school by age 25.
Then there are the types of jobs that have been created. Perry has little to say about them. And there’s a good reason. Nearly forty percent of them are bottom rung, minimum wage retail and service industry jobs.
Finally...
[link to external website removed] brink-legislative-study-group-says/
Here's a look at how Texas compares to other states:
At the bottom:
— Tax expenditures per capita (47th)
— Percent of population 25 and older with a high school diploma (50th)
— Percent of poor people covered by Medicaid (49th)
— Percent of population with employer-based health insurance (48th)
— Per capita spending on mental health (50th)
— Per capita spending on Medicaid (49th)
— Percent of non-elderly women with health insurance (50th)
— Percent of women receiving prenatal care in first trimester (50th)
— Average credit score (49th)
— Workers' compensation coverage (50th)
Near the top:
— Number of executions (1st)
— Public school enrollment (2nd)
— Percent of uninsured children (1st)
— Percent of children living in poverty (4th)
— Percent of population uninsured (1st)
— Percent of population living below poverty (4th)
— Percent of population with food insecurity (2nd)
— Overall birth rate (2nd)
— Amount of carbon dioxide emissions (1st)
— Amount of toxic chemicals released into water (1st)
— Amount of hazardous waste generated (1st)
@Greg....you can spin things any way you want, I guess you learned something from Obama. It does not change the fact that 39% of jobs created since Obama took office were created in Texas. A good amount were low paying jobs, but its still 39% of all jobs created in the USA. Funny how when White House announces jobs created you look at that in a positive light, even if there minimum wage, but when someone brings up how 39% of them were created in Perrys state you label them as low paying. You cant credit Obama for credit jobs but diss Perry for them being low paying when its the same job
Whoa @Greg those are some pretty heavy stats! I know repubs don't give a *** about the middle class and the poor, but those stats on what Perry has done to the environment in Texas should be taken very seriously! Repubs justify cutting government spending because they are looking out for the future of the country but what about the future of the resources in this country?! Perry seems like if he had the chance, he would turn America into a toxic wasteland where we have to drink recycled waste water like some town in Texas is having to do.
You can find statistics on every single state that make the state look bad and you can also find ones that make it look great. Texas ranked #1 in jobs created, 3rd in personal income, 3rd in college graduates, 3rd in exports, 4th in masters degrees,5th in college degrees for African Americans, 1st in production workers wages, 1st in compensation in rail, trucking, air, natural gas, mining industries, 1st in surplus in state govt, 1st in amount of free health clinics, the list can go on and on.
@Muffie Thanks! It's funny and sad how people refuse to recognize the true agenda of the right for the people of America: corporate masters and worker slaves.
@NJRoller I appreciated you comment from yesterday's thread. Its always good to hear both sides, even if we don't agree. Have a great day everyone!
NJ
I guess to a Republican, facts are spin if they don't agree with your politics. But the facts are those are low paying jobs that has kept Texans at the bottom of the ladder while Perry has been President.
I never touted Obama's job record either.
You can spin things how you like but Perry has turned Texas into a third world where the poor stays poor and the middle class will soon be there.
Spin? No, try facts.
@NJ
Let's take your stats that Texas is third in personal income...
[link to external website removed]
PERSONAL INCOME PER CAPITA1 IN CURRENT DOLLARS, 2007
[When states share the same rank, the next lower rank is omitted. Because of rounded data, states may have identical values shown, but different ranks. Cautionary note]
State Dollars Rank United States 38,611 (X) Alabama 32,404 42 Alaska 40,352 15 Arizona 33,029 40 Arkansas 30,060 48 California 41,571 7 Colorado 41,042 10 Connecticut 54,117 1 Delaware 40,608 12 District of Columbia 61,092 (X) Florida 38,444 20 Georgia 33,457 38 Hawaii 39,239 18 Idaho 31,197 44 Illinois 40,322 16 Indiana 33,616 37 Iowa 35,023 27 Kansas 36,768 22 Kentucky 31,111 46 Louisiana 34,756 31 Maine 33,722 35 Maryland 46,021 5 Massachusetts 49,082 3 Michigan 35,086 26 Minnesota 41,034 11 Mississippi 28,845 50 Missouri 34,389 32 Montana 32,458 41 Nebraska 36,471 24 Nevada 40,480 13 New Hampshire 41,512 8 New Jersey 49,194 2 New Mexico 31,474 43 New York 47,385 4 North Carolina 33,636 36 North Dakota 34,846 29 Ohio 34,874 28 Oklahoma 34,153 33 Oregon 34,784 30 Pennsylvania 38,788 19 Rhode Island 39,463 17 South Carolina 31,013 47 South Dakota 33,905 34 Tennessee 33,280 39 Texas 37,187 21 Utah 31,189 45 Vermont 36,670 23 Virginia 41,347 9 Washington 38,414 14 West Virginia 29,537 49 Wisconsin 36,047 25 Wyoming
Your list is from 2007, i got my info off this website [link to external website removed]
Rank # 1 California: # 2 New York: # 3 Texas: # 4 Florida: # 5 Illinois: # 6 Pennsylvania: # 7 New Jersey: # 8 Ohio: # 9 Michigan: # 10 Virginia: # 11 Georgia: # 12 Massachusetts: # 13 North Carolina: # 14 Maryland: # 15 Washington: # 16 Indiana: # 17 Minnesota: # 18 Tennessee: # 19 Missouri: # 20 Wisconsin: # 21 Arizona: # 22 Colorado: # 23 Connecticut: # 24 Alabama: # 25 South Carolina: # 26 Kentucky: # 27 Oregon: # 28 Oklahoma: # 29 Louisiana: # 30 Iowa: # 31 Kansas: # 32 Nevada: # 33 Arkansas: # 34 Mississippi: # 35 Utah: # 36 Nebraska: # 37 New Mexico: # 38 New Hampshire: # 39 West Virginia: # 40 Hawaii: # 41 Maine: # 42 Idaho: # 43 Rhode Island: # 44 Delaware: # 45 District of Columbia: # 46 Montana: # 47 South Dakota: # 48 Alaska: # 49 Vermont: # 50 North Dakota:
@NJ
My mistake. I thought you meant INDIVIDUAL personal income, which Texas ranks near the bottom. It's understandable that Texas would be third in total income because of it's size. Looking at your site, it looks like the most populist states are at the top.
As far as Individual personal income for singles and families, Texas ranks near the bottom.
@NJ
Employment 10,828,496 [2nd of 52] Gross State Product > Current Dollars $880,936,000,000.00 [3rd of 56] Median Earnings for Male Full-Time, Year-Round Workers $38,200.00 [30th of 51] Median Family Income $49,086.00 [37th of 51] Median Household Income $41,759.00 [31st of 51] Nest Egg Index 92.02 [43rd of 50] Percent below poverty level 16.6% [8th of 51] Percent of Children Below Poverty Level 22.9 % [9th of 51] Percent of Households With Retirement Income 13.8 % [47th of 51] Percent of People 65 Years and Over Below Poverty Level 12.5 % [8th of 51] Percent of Related Children Below Poverty Level 22.6 % [9th of 51] Personal income $744,665,000,000.00 [3rd of 51] Total tax burden $30,751,860,000.00 [3rd of 50] DEFINITION: Total tax burden in US dollars, includes local and federal tax. SOURCE: Bureau of Economic Analysis regional data, 2005 Total tax burden (per capita) $1,368.45 [50th of 50] Unemployment 568,691 [2nd of 52] Unemployment rate 5% [12th of 52] Welfare Caseloads > Percent change in total families 2.3% [21st of 54] Welfare Caseloads > Percent change in total recipients 1% [21st of 54] Welfare Caseloads > Total families 132,796 [3rd of 54] Welfare Caseloads > Total recipients 333,435 [3rd of 54]
Listen theres 100 ways to make that statistic...percentage of population that graduates college, percentage of students who start college who finish, percent of HS graduates who go to and finish college, the actual amount of students who finish college instead of the percentage, etc, etc. So I have better things to do than argue about some stupid statistics. Back to my original point, that Texas created 39% of EVERY SINGLE JOB created while Obama has been president. So give credit where credit is due. Maybe you want to argue that many were low paying jobs, and thats fine and true. However, of all the jobs created since the recession started, high paying and low paying ones…39% of them were created in Texas. You cant dispute that. Every state has statistics to back up how there good and everyone can find stats on why there not. You can have stats on personal income by state population, per capita, per GSP, etc so they vary depending on what its based on. So get over it
@NJ
Those stats came from your website, which was very informative. But if you see household, family earnings, nest egg, welfare, retirement, Texas is towards the bottom.
Now a question for you NJ... Forget about Obama's policies, do you really, HONESTLY think Perry did a good job as Governor? You this the numbers that show how the poor and middle class are doing is something you want for the country as a whole?
@NJ
The stats do not lie. They only change because you see it does not support what you're saying. My point is why create all of those poor jobs if the people are still living in poverty and can't bring themselves up? What good are these jobs if it's creating health problems due to lax environmental rules? Do you want one of those jobs where you can't even live on?
You know why Texas created those jobs? Because no other governor would do their people that bad and sell them out like that just for a cheap job. This is what we have waiting for us with Perry as President.
Honestly I dont know enough about his job in Texas and dont plan to vote for him. All i know is his job creation and how after taking over as govenor from Bush the people in Texas elected him twice, so they obviously are happy with him. Honestly, Obama has done an awful job, doesnt lead, points the finger at everyone but himself, no ideas or plans. Economy should have been his top priority 3yrs ago but instead he spent his first year as president pushing govt run healthcare down our throats because growing the size of govt was his priority, which if anything will hurt job growth. The courts are now ruling parts of it unconstitutional. He's had 3yrs to turn things around and hasnt at all, so any of the candidates would do better than him. It would be nice if we had some better republicans to pick from but there still better than Obama. If Obama was a republican, and they did the things Obama has done, done nothing for economy, blamed everyone but themselves, etc etc, can you honestly say you would want to reelect them? You guys would *** all over them. He blames everything on Congress b/c Republicans are running it. Democrats run everything else. When Reagan was President the Democrats ran the House and halfway thru his presidency they ran both House and Senate and he got tons accomplished because he was a leader. He came in with a plan and led to get his plan accomplished and didn’t take *** from anyone. Can you honestly say with a straight face that your better off now than when Obama was elected? Can you honestly say with a straight face that Obama is a great president that’s working tirelessly to turn this economy around? Do you really look at Obama on tv and say, “Man I need more of that?”
@ Greg
Look man, no matter what stat u come up with to make Rick Perry look bad, or look like he didn't do ***, or to say that Texas ain't doin ***....
U, I, AND NJ KNOW THE TRUTH ! TEXAS CREATED JOBS AND OBAMA DIDN'T ! CASE CLOSED !
Actually, 57% percent of all jobs created in the last 12 months were created in Texas.
I like the current democratic talking points to make it seem like Perry didn't have *** to do with why all these jobs were created.
Sayin *** about the oil companies profits and the military spending in Texas, and even money from the stimulus is the reason why Texas did well B.U.L.L.S.H.Y.T.E. !
LOW TAXES + LESS REGULATION = MORE JOBS CREATED !
DEMOCRATS WILL NEVER DO THE MATH RIGHT !
THIS IS DUE TO LOW TAXES AND LESS REGULATION THAN OTHER STATES LIKE CALI WHICH ARE BLEEDING JOBS DUE TO BAD BUSINESS CLIMATE AND GOING BROKE DUE TO GOVT. UNION CONTRACTS !
@NJ
You want to know what my main problem with Obama is? He caters to Republicans too much. If he had more of a backbone then I think he could have gotten more accomplished. But he’s so busy trying to ‘reach across the aisle’ that he sacrifices his own ideas. Just about every bad policy that Obama has was from a compromise that he did with Republicans. It’s fine that he hasn’t solved the ‘jobs’ crisis because this was an epic meltdown to our economy caused by a Republican President. When Roosevelt took over for Hoover during the Great Depression it took him way more than 4 years to get us out of it, and he only succeeded because of World War II. If you remember, Roosevelt decided to pay down the deficit because Republicans were calling for it, and when he did, it put the country back into another depression. Obama has been in office way less time than Roosevelt, so yeah, I am so much better off now than when Obama was elected. Bush was a disaster. I will vote for Obama again because the Republicans will finish off what Bush started, and that is destroying the country and moving away from a Democracy to Fascism.
As for Romney, if the man stopped pandering to Conservatives he would have a chance. He is trying to run from his Romneycare but criticize Obama for Obamacare. Romney isn’t Right-Wing but trying to fit in with them just to get their endorsement. Maybe if he played it straight he might would have a chance, but as of right now, he has no chance. Unless the Republicans run someone else chances are looking good for Obama and a second term. People might not like what Obama has accomplished, but they like the Republicans even less.
@Katt
Then move to Texas. But you won't because you won't work for such low wages. Don't try and build up something you won't do yourself. You know those wages are *** and you wouldn't want to work a job with them either. Any state could have had 60% of the jobs if they were willing to gut environmental protections and subsidize companies while taking away from the people. Which is what Perry did. Who can't create a job if you're giving businesses every single thing they want at the expense of the people.
@Barn
Stats are stats... it seems you post them when they agree with your talking points. But when they don't, they don't mean anything. Whether it's from 10 years ago or not it still shows a pattern of *** things up.
And a Bush supporter *** be saying anything about the economy since he's the cause of it and you supported it when he was President.
@NJ
Again, what is that telling you if Perry created all of those jobs but they still have a deficit larger than California's? It means they subsidized all of those businesses at the expense of state money. How are they going to pay it off? They don't collect taxes? Are they going to keep taking away from schools? Or are they hoping Perry becomes President so he can just send federal money to Texas to pay it off?
@Barn
Even you voted for Bush twice in spite of the overwhelming evidence that he was borderline illiterate as well as a disaster. Like I said, you're the last person who should say anything about Obama being up for the job since his biggest crime is continuing Bush policies. If he had gotten rid of Bush policies, his approval would be much higher, and that's something that isn't in dispute.
@Barn
The fact that you say the economy was better under Bush shows there's no hope for you. I think most people who are Republicans can admit that Bush was a disaster. If the economy was so good why did Bush send out 'Bush checks' to people? Why did he push a stimulus? Why did banks start failing? Why didn't any Republican candidates want Bush campaigning with them? The last year of Bush presidency he had given up because he had no clue what he was doing. People even said he had started drinking again due to the stress and pressures.
@Barn
The only frustration is with you koolaid drinkers to cling to your falsehoods and fantasies to spin things the way you want. Nobody but a diehard Bush supporter would ever think Bush was good for this country. You never really defend Bush because you know you can't, you just turn it back to Obama. My hopes and dreams were not *** because I didn't expect much from Obama because I knew what Bush caused couldn't be turned around in 1 term. I always said we would see the true Obama in the second term, and that was before he was even inaugurated.
@Prissy
Thank you. I'm glad to see you're back as well. Your comments were missed.
The Republicans in here are what's wrong with this country. Whereas you and I, and others have stated our disappointment with Obama, the Republicans in here still continue to try and talk up their candidates, even if it means lying for them.
I have problems with the way Bush ran the economy too. But I dont like this talk that he was a "deer in the headlights" when 9/11 happened. when he was told about it in the classroom it was after 1st plane hit, it was unclear if it was an accident or terror attack. So he did not want to scare the kids so processed it and left the room 4 minutes later. Then he went hard agaist the terrorist, more than most presidents would have. He took a tough stance on terror so its unfair to imply he didnt. Most liberals say he took to hard of a stance on terror. There wasnt a single attack for the rest of his presidency…7years. Obama campaigned against Bush’s hard stance on terror and swore he would close Guantanamo, have trials in NYC and not military tribunals, end the wars, etc. Instead Obama has preserved just about all of Bush’s “controversial” programs that he criticized Bush for, did not close Guantanamo, did not hold a trial in civilian courts for terrorists, he surged the amount of troops in the war and started a new one in Libya, etc. He realized how Bush policies on terrorism worked to keep us safe and that they need to be done. So don’t trash Bush for creating those policies than praise Obama for keeping them. Yes Obama did order Bin Laden to be killed and he should be praised for that. He showed leadership in that case and made a wonderful executive decision to do so. When you look at how the information was gathered, it did come from things Bush had done and set up. I am not giving credit for it to Bush, b/c Obama gave the order to get it done, however the military intelligence info used to find him would not have been discovered if it wasn’t for policies Bush put into place. So it was Bush policies and Obama’s leadership that ultimately got him killed. It was all made possible by the relentless, sustained pressure on al Qaeda that Bush administration initiated after 9/11 and that the Obama administration has wisely chosen to continue. You can criticize Bush for various things, but national security is not one of them.